Not surprisingly, Janko Tipsarevic is backing his good friend Novak Djokovic. When asked about the recent rise of Roger Federer, Tipsarevic offered an explanation.

“I am not sure that Federer would stand a chance playing Novak from last year – I am not saying this because Nole is my friend, but because that is what I really think,” Tipsarevic said. “Secondly, I was told that this year was the fastest Australian Open ever, it was the first year in who knows how many that the courts weren’t resurfaced. If the court isn’t resurfaced, it gets faster every year. Also, the balls in Melbourne usually get bigger as the match progresses and this year they were getting smaller.”

Due to a series of foot issues, Tipsarevic hasn’t been a factor on tour in over three years. But now 32, Tipsarevic has finally returned to the Top 100. A year ago he wasn’t even ranked! However, a hamstring injury has prevented him from playing in Davis Cup this weekend for Serbia.

Alls I can say is this Janko, yes, Nole is your bud and you’re sticking up for him. Kudos to you.
But your just proving Feds greatness by using the surface excuse. It just proves Fed can play championship tennis on any court, any speed, others can’t?
This reminds me of the Madrid Blue, where 3 of the top 4 top players were whining about the surface, except one guy. That “guy”, won the tournament.

Tipsa is a bit tipsy i think! Plus, of course he will support Novak. They are great friends, in fact, is Tipsa still playing, or does he want a bit of the lime light now that he has gone down the rankings and seems to have really not been in the headlines very much – you have to give him his due for putting himself back in the limelight – pity is, it is all opinion and not fact.

Djokovic is always a class act, and we know that: here is what he said about Fed and Rafa:

“The Federer-Nadal rivalry is the biggest one in the history. Roger had his ups and downs in the last 3-4 years but came back swinging and revitalised after a six-month layoff last year. What he achieved in the beginning of the season is an example that one can play at such high level even at this age. Congrats to Nadal too, it´s nice to see them playing at the highest level again,” Djokovic said, as quoted by tennisworldusa.org.

Djokovic has always been a decent guy. He has consistente show utter respect and admiration to Federer and Nadal. It is his unreasonable fanatic fans and brown-nosing friends who keep disrespecting other players.

Lakie it was in poor taste, it was my very first post here on TX, i remember saying at the time had it been Federer and Stan, or Rafa and Feli, how there wouldve been an out cry had it been one of them ….

More of Tipsarevic’s views from that same interview were published by Tennis World: “He (Tipsarevic) often praised Rafael Nadal, who is a great friend. A few years ago the Spaniard player convinced Tipsarevic to go through a stamina cells treatment in order to solve knee issues. ‘It helped me a ton watching Rafa… One of his (Tipsarevic’s) biggest regrets is the 2008 Australian Open match lost to Federer 10-8 in the fifth set. ‘I have beaten many Top 10 players and I wish I had beaten Roger then, it would have been a terrific memory, but it did not happen. I remember there was really a small amount of chances I did not use in that match. He had 36 aces in five sets. I felt like I was the better player in the longer rallies, but he used his serve and forehand so effectively and he didn’t let himself to be drawn that often or backhand exchanges or something like that.’ ”

What Tipsarevic conveniently omitted about his 2008 Australian Open match was that Federer was suffering from mononucleosis during that tournament (that bout of mono was the impetus of Fed’s 18-month slump between 2008 Australian and 2009 Rome, where he lost an uncharacteristic 21 matches). As well, Federer had arrived in Melbourne without a warm-up tournament but with food poisoning which kept him from practicing and preparing. Only this year, seeing how fit and able Federer is at age 35 can we finally understand how Federer managed to reach the 2008 Australian Open semifinals while suffering from mono as well as the 2008 French and Wimbledon finals within months of that mono illness.

Without mono, Federer would have thrashed Tipsarevic. Federer has never lost to Tipsarevic. In his other five matches against Tipsarevic between 2006 and 2012, Federer won without dropping a set (Tipsarevic did not win more than 4 games in any set).

That 6-7, 7-6, 5-7, 6-1,10-8 match does not indicate that mono-compromised Federer was the better player and deserved to win the match sooner. Federer won 54% of 374 points, while Tipsarevic won only 46%. Federer created 21 breakpoints (5 converted), while Tipsarevic had only 3 breakpoints (3 converted). Federer put Tipsarevic’s serve under pressure, winning 36% of Tipsarevic’s 207 serves. Tipsarevic won only 23% of Federer’s 167 serves.

That 4.5 hour match drained Federer, who was running on fumes through the rest of the 2008 Australian. making him vulnerable in his semifinal against Djokovic.

Novak was fortunate that while he came up without significant sponsorship and almost 2 years behind the tennis training of his peers because of war economics…he had Janko and Zim to give him pointers and a sense of direction when he 1st made the Tour. Like Rafa, Djokovic keeps his friends and comrades from days before he was a big star and they reciprocate.
Good to see Tipsarevic back. He may not have a lot of top tennis left in him at his age and years of injury meant he never got back to his 2010 -11 form, but he was a Top 10 player and is a very bright athlete.
Like “Climate”, competitive sport is never in stasis for long. Change happens naturally. 2015-16 Djokovic was demonstrably better that Rafa or Fed However, in the middle of Djokovics 6 years of relative domination, you still had Rafa Nadal beat him out for #1 in 2013 and some matches where Federer was the better player. Now Federer has one last great glory run happening, as befits one with the good fortune of longevity and still one of the greatest to play. I believe the man who won the non-calendar Grand Slam will be back. And I believe Rafa still has a few great victories left in him.

Djokovic, as good as he has been, is unlikely to be as dominant again – signs of his decline were apparent 18 months ago (even when he was still winning majors) and they accelerated in the latter half of 2016. The way Kyrgios has beaten him twice recently presages a tough future for him (notwithstanding yesterday’s DC win). The power players now really trouble him (and boy, was he fortunate that Delpo has spent most of his career injured).

Djokovic is just a glorified retriever and grinder at best. He is a better grinder than Nadal but without any weapons like Nadal’s forehand. His H2H against Roger was less than 35% wins until Feds turned 30, which is like the death knell for an elite tennis player. We’ll see what Djokovic does after 30. He is done and dusted and with Kyrgios’ ascendancy and Roger’s revival he doesn’t stand a chance to even get a sniff at semi-finals of slams. Only Federer with his effortless playing style and unheard of talent can flourish beyond 30. Nadal broke him down mentally because of his match-up advantage against Fed and Fed in his stubbornness continued to challange Nadal from the baseline and kept losing. Federer could have changed but he was too stubborn as a younger dude, however between him, Djoko and Nadal only he is capable of change. The other two have a style and they’ll live or die by it. At least Nadal learnt how to approach the net, Djoko couldn’t pick even that up after so much time under Becker. Djoker flourished between 2011 and 2016 when Nadal was perpetually injured and Federer mentally decimated by Nadal and also hounded by his own little niggling ailments and injuries. Federer as an old dude of 34 was constantly beating Novak in 3 setters in 2015, where endurance and stamina play a lesser role and you just can’t expect a 34 year Roger to have the same level of stamina as a 28 year old Djoko! If Djokovic was so great he should have won at least 14 slams by now. It’ll be a miracle if he can win even one more. And, please do not compare him to Roger who is winning slams at 35. Roger has an aggressive, shorten the points playing style which is diametrically opposite to tire the opponent to death style of Djokovic. Djokovic body is already falling apart and his style of play is unsustainable after 30. Did you see what happened to David Ferrer? Novak and Rafa will just fade away before they hit 32. Good luck to all these who are hoping a Roger like performance from these two hard core retrievers in their 30s.

Aces out – you make some valid points ; however I would disagree with your description of Djokovic as just a retriever.
He plays the way he does, cause that was the only way he could beat Nadal and Fed.
By 2011, he had realised that to beat Nadal, he has to outlast him. The same technique could also work against Federer since Federer was getting older.
Had Nole stuck to his naturally aggressive game ( seen in the early years of his career), he probably would have won fewer slams and would not have been the dominant player he is.
Credit to Nole for being able to change his game to beat the two greatest tennis players , and while doing this himself joining the club of greatest players.

I do doubt how much success he will have post 30 due to the physical nature of his game, however am sure he will have stretches of success and maybe win a few more slams

As for Djokovic acc. to Fedards surely not doing well after 30 because he plays a “physical game”, lets look at those players with some great years post-30 in the Open Era. Connors, Lendl, and Agassi played a physical, baseline game. Just because Fedfans see his game as “effortless genius” does not make it so, nor does it rule out an “Iron Man” like Djokovic having a long career with a physical game.

Djokovic also has a style of play that is less taxing than what Ferrer, Andy, and Rafa deploy. His ability to slide on any surface means he largely escapes the ligament wear and tear on his legs -the energy from stops is not absorbed by shin, ankle, knee, and hip ligaments and bursa. But replaceble sneaker rubber. And the physics is E=MV^2/2. The skinny and now too skinny Djokovic does not create the level of energy that Rafa and Andy need to get similar speed or get rid of that speed on quick stops.
He is similar to Fed, with a different approach and style – but skinny, light on his feet and a relatively healthy Iron Man constitution, like Fed. Roger plays shorter points, but Djokovic is a world class athlete with great flexibility he works on several times a day.

Tommy Haas. The Weak Era would have been a whole lot less weak if Nalbandian had been healthy, Safin mentally stable, and Haas and his parents had not suffered severe injury.
We might have had a Big 4 before the actual Big 4 emerged. And Fed would not have padded his Slamcount.
As was, when Hollywood Haas was 100% healthy, he had wins over Federer and Djokovic on hardcourt and grass.

One thing that Djokovic does is have a pattern of losing to some power players before adapting and ‘solving’ the problem. Roddick, Berdych and Isner bothered Djokovic early in their H2Hs. Then Djokovic learned to read them and prevailed in later encounters. He and Delpo have brought out the best in each other in a half dozen thrillers but it’s still 13-4 Novak.
Stan of course is a different animal. Stan was better early on, then Djokovic dominated his pal and regular practice partner, then Stan adapted around 2013 and began giving Novak great trouble. Power of Stans strokes is definitely part of that and Stans willingness to attack and gamble he will be consistent – in several big matches.
And Kyrgios is a new beast. He’s taken down Djokovic in in close fights their 1st 2 encounters. But both happened in 2017 when Djokovic was in full suckitude. I think Novak may level or move ahead of Kyrgios in the next couple years, but maybe not. For sure there are upcoming players 10 years younger than Djokovic that will have an edge on Novak if he sticks around another 5-6 years, and Kyrgios is my “most likely” guy.

DC,
Don’t forget about the retooling of Novak;s serve, and the impact that had on his game. Technically his ground strokes have alway been there, so there is that. But when you can dictate with your serve, you have a really good chance of staying in the match.

Chrisford, dream on – in a couple of years’ time, Djokovic will have retired. No-one can keep sliding around the court like he does after the age of 30 without a serious injury occurring. If he stops sliding around, he’ll continue his fall down the rankings. He’s been finding it harder and harder to win over the past 18 months – he’s experiencing what most players have approaching the age of 30 (which he almost is) – a decline in ability. Please don’t make the mistake of assuming that, because Federer can be successful post-30, Djokovic will be, too. History would suggest otherwise. If he wins one more major, he’ll be doing well.

Oh, and the true weak era occurred between 2012-15. During that time, the world number 1’s only real threat was 6 years older than he was (and Federer had a bad back in 2013). Nadal, DelPotro and Murray were all injured for huge swathes of that period – leaving the likes of Ferrer and Berdych to pose a non-threat to Novak, allowing him to pad his masters 1000 titles total. How incredibly lucky he was.

Federer had to deal with a fit Nalbandian, a fit Roddick (who was able to beat Djokovic FIVE times in 2009), a fit Safin, a fit Hewitt, a fit Davydenko, a fit Soderling (all of whom were demonstrably superior to their equivalents in 2012-15). And, of course, 2 years after Federer won his first major, Nadal won his. Some weak era!

Had Federer not been around, Roddick would have won multiple slams and considered among the best. Nalbandian would have won a couple, maybe even more. Safin, could have had more than two. Hewitt a few more. Even Ljubucic may have won a major. Then that period, would have been called a strong era. But Federer happened and stopped all of these would have been greats. So all this weak era chrisford harps about is nothing but illogical sourgrape thinking.

I see my physics lesson went in one ear and out the other. That doesn’t make the physics any less true. His sliding is not for any player…but this guy has strong but very flexible ligaments, has been skiing since he was able to walk, and weighs less than any player his height on tour. He is another Iron Man like Lendl, Fed, and Connors – just has good health and few injuries..No diminution of speed noted. And Djokovic is someone that always works on bettering his game, probably is the brightest of the Big 4 or the other legends before them.
I think he has 3-4 Slams in him, being conservative. Rafa may have one.

Markus – Roddick was Federer’s whipping boy like Federer was Rafa’s whipping boy. As for Djokovic, I believe the last time Roger beat him in a Slam Final was back in 2007…..(Rafa had the same deal for 10 years until Fed finally got one off Rafa in the 2017 AO Final. )

Again, I never say that Federer is a bum. He is a great player. But his records are padded. I believe if all 4 had been the same age, started at the same time, Rafa would have had the most Slams until he reached 28 or so. (BTW, Rafa wiped out each of the guys you claim prove Roger’s weak era was in fact a strong era). After Rafa hit 28, perhaps Djokovic or Federer would have caught up to him in the course of a career in terms of “Slamcount”.
But those that say Rafa was the best of the Big 4 will not have me, a Djokovic fan, saying that there is no way…because on many measurements, Rafa has been the toughest guy. Nole 2.0 was more or less a homage to Rafa…it was 80% Djokovic learning to equal or exceed Rafa’s heart, stamina, and mental strength.
Only 2 guys that have played Nadal more than a handful of times has a positive H2H over him. The odd outlier of Davydenko beating him on hardcourt while luckily avoiding clay clashes….and You Know Who.

Chrisford, Djokovic has a losing record against Federer’s whipping boy. I can also say Djokovic’s record is padded because his compeition consists of a man 6 years older and a lot of players hampered by injuries. But what is really the point in that? Djokovic, just like Federer, is a great player who in their carrers have often been victorious over those they have played against. The truth is Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are among the greatest who have ever played the game. I can never understand why in trying to praise one, you feel the need to diminish the achievements of the others. Don’t you realize the doing that will in consequence also diminish that very same player you so try to boost?

It’s not a fair head to head since one side often shows up to play while the other side does not. Since 2006 Wimbledon, the vast majority of Nadal’s wins against Federer happened while Roger was in a (relative) slump and Nadal was in good form — a slumping Federer often remains on the tour and even goes deep into clay events so Nadal gets more chances to beat a slumping Federer. On the other hand, when Nadal is in a slump and Federer is hot, Nadal often avoids him so Federer gets less chances to beat a slumping Nadal. When Federer is in good form, he tends to whip a befuddled Nadal (sometimes even on clay) who does not know what to do when his Plan A is not working.

Between 2006 Wimbledon and 2007 World Tour Finals (Tennis Masters Cup), Federer had a 5-2 winning record against Nadal. During this period, Federer has beaten Nadal on all surfaces (clay, grass, hardcourt) and even bageled Nadal on clay and grass (he also bageled Nadal on hardcourts at 2011 WTF.

In early 2008, it took a bout of mononucleosis (glandular fever) and later back injury to put Federer into an 18-month slump between 2008 Australian and 2009 Rome, where Federer uncharacteristically lost 21 matches to several players (including 5 matches to Nadal and several matches to unheralded players). It’s ludicrous that many so-called tennis experts claim that the two best Federer-Nadal matches are 2008 Wimbledon and 2009 Australian Open — during the period when Federer was in a relative slump and vulnerable to losses to more players.

Once Federer recovered his form to beat Nadal in straight sets at 2009 Madrid, Nadal soon left the tour for several months and avoided Federer for an entire year until 2010 Madrid (during Federer’s slump after the 2010 Australian). Since 2006 Wimbledon, the only non-clay match that Federer lost while he was in good form was 2012 Australian Open (though perhaps Federer was upset and distracted by Nadal’s politicking in the ATP Players Council during that tournament, see the article “Rafael Nadal claims Roger Federer cares more about his image than fellow professionals” ). When Federer proved to be hot in much of 2012, Nadal disappered from the tour and played golf tournaments during the 2012 US Open and 2013 Australian Open (he won the later golf tournament).

Remember: What Federer is doing is unprecedented in the Open Era.

35-year old Federer is the oldest man to win a major in the ATP era (which began September 1972). Jimmy Connors’ last major title came shortly after his 31st birthday (1983 US Open) and last major final was at age 31 (1984 Wimbledon). Ivan Lendl’s last major title came at age 29 (1990 Australian Open) and last major final was at age 30 (1990 Australian Open). Agassi’s last major title came at age 32 (2003 Australian Open) and last major final at age 35 (2005 US Open) – when Agassi retired at age 36 he had played about 200 matches less than Federer has done today. When 35-year old Federer won this Australian Open, it was his 1,332nd match.

Federer is the first man to beat four top-ten players to win a major title since Wilander won the 1982 French Open. All four top ten players were major finalists with a total of 17 major titles, including the reigning U.S. Open champion. Tennis Channel’s tennis expert Steve Flink reflected on Federer’s GOATness: “I can’t think of anyone else but Federer who could have gone through a field like this after such a long time away from the game… But now Federer has widened the gap between himself and his most crucial adversary and the Swiss has a comfortable 18-14 lead at the Grand Slam events. I am convinced that Nadal will never catch Federer. Moreover, a slumping Novak Djokovic—beaten in his last three majors after sweeping four in a row—is stuck at 12 majors. He will win a bunch more but 16 may be his limit. No one in this generation will match Federer. I believe Federer has reaffirmed that he must be regarded as the greatest player ever to lift a tennis racket.” After Miami Fink added: “(Federer) brilliantly concealed his fatigue… that Federer was even in the final at Miami was a testament to his mental toughness, unwavering determination and extraordinary poise under pressure… who could put it past him to do something patently absurd on the red clay of Roland Garros?”http://tennischannel.com/reporters/steve-flink/steve-flink-australian-open-2017-retrospective

@J.S. it depends on what week’s rankings the tournament uses for its seedings. Most use at least the week before the tournament, if not 2 weeks. I can’t imagine a whole lot of ranking shuffling between now and then though.

It’s also hard to say because we don’t know for sure who is playing. It sounds like Djokovic is back from injury, but Murray may still be sitting out at that point (though he is back to practicing)

Chris Ford …. wake up! You put up a Djokovic match in the main show court and Federer’s practice session in outside courts at the same time and sell tickets for both. There’s a strong possibility that Federer’s practice session will sell more tickets than Novak’s match. It’s just the way it is. Roger is the god of tennis for a reason and most people prefer Novak’s for a reason again.

In the very end, it is Djokovic’s destiny to be forgotten under the burden of Roger’s talent by 2020. Rafa however might survive the history books as the King of Clay.

Aced Out – You write with all the arrogance of a Fedard. Rafa “might” be remembered in the history books, Novak of course forgotten, and you didn’t even deem Stan, Andy, and Delpo worth a mention.

1. Outside Wimbledon, a fact as certain as rain in the UK is a 2nd statue will join Fred Perry. To the best British player ever, bringer of Wimbledon, Olympic Gold, and Davis Cup titles after an 80+ year drought.
2. Rafa will be remembered like Pete and Bjorn Borg – changing the face of tennis. A force. The toughest player to face. (As Novak and Roger both state about facing Rafa). A very nice, quirky guy.
3. Djokovic, who may also make a big mark outside tennis. But if he is remembered just for tennis, the best hardcourt and 2nd best claycourt player of his generation and “good enough” on grass for 3 Wimbledons. The most complete tennis player of the Open era. Like Rafa, a one of a kind.
4. Stan and Delpo get remembered as guys good enough to beat any in the Big 4.
5. Federer will of course be remembered as if not the best – the ‘most loved’ and the guy with more trophies than his rivals – who gave into form 4, and 5 years after Fed did, in more competitive times. The ‘Weak Era” Hewitt then Fed enjoyed will always be discussed and Rafa and Novaks H2Hs with him.

[My belief is if all 4 had started at the same time, at the same age, Rafa would have had the best record of the 4 guys until late in their careers, when Rafa’s toll of injuries and missed time would have Fed or Novak move past him in most metrics of success. ]

I also believe Andy is capable of joining the other 3 with a career Slam. That there is a chance, very slim, that Rafa might get a double career Slam and a moderate chance Federer or Djokovic could. i doubt Federer, Rafa, or Andy will ever get a non calendar year Grand Slam and doubt Novak can repeat his great feat.
Djokovic will finish with the most Masters 1000 wins and that mark may stand like Fed’s 302 weeks as #1 half inside the Weak Era and half outside it. Only Djokovic can attain a Masters Sweep…and to get it he will have to beat tough competition on Cincinnati’s fast courts.

I believe Federer will be King of Endorsement Money. Djokovic the winner of the most prize money won. And of course Federer will win the most Edberg Awards. Fed can retire and somehow, the machinations and politics will align to continue Fed getting his annual Edberg Award even then.

Roddi was a weak baseline counterpuncher with a new serve that he invented but failed to make unpredictable and convenient. This had nothing to do with Federer.

The weak era was the worst time. Rod Laver witnessed Roddick, Safin and Hewitt’s weak and disgusting attitude.
Rod saw Roddi vomit in buckets due to fear of playing on fast hard court and losing against Andrei Pavel.
It was truly humiliating for the USA…

I guess Federer cried hysterically when he didn’t win 25 Slams by age 27 to fool the most stupid idiots, especially the fairweather tennis watchers that only watched Slams.
I’ve never seen more delusional tennis sycophants in the media and on court.

Too bad the “non-aggressive” Djoker destroyed the physical Nadal and physical tennis- dependent Federer.
Fed avoided his weak era muppet Roddi because he was afraid that his own physical tennis would injure him and therefore let Roddick win fake Slams and Davis Cup.
Fed and Nadal whined about old age when they took a lot of time off with fake injuries only when Djoker played in Slam finals.
Roddick and Hewitt wouldn’t have stopped any of these guys from playing more Slam finals.